Off–balance sheet lending-related financial instruments, guarantees, and other commitments

JPMorgan Chase provides lending-related financial instruments (e.g., commitments and guarantees) to meet the financing needs of its customers. The contractual amount of these financial instruments represents the maximum possible credit risk to the Firm should the counterparty draw upon the commitment or the Firm be required to fulfill its obligation under the guarantee, and should the counterparty subsequently fail to perform according to the terms of the contract. Most of these commitments and guarantees expire without being drawn or a default occurring. As a result, the total contractual amount of these instruments is not, in the Firm’s view, representative of its actual future credit exposure or funding requirements. For further discussion of lending-related commitments and guarantees, and the Firm’s related accounting policies, see Note 29 on pages 308–315 of JPMorgan Chase’s 2012 Annual Report.

To provide for the risk of loss inherent in consumer (excluding credit card) and wholesale contracts, an allowance for credit losses on lending-related commitments is maintained. See Note 14 on page 176 of this Form 10-Q for further discussion regarding the allowance for credit losses on lending-related commitments.

The following table summarizes the contractual amounts and carrying values of off-balance sheet lending-related financial instruments, guarantees and other commitments at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012. The amounts in the table below for lending-related commitments represent the total available credit, inclusive of certain non-legally binding lines of credit. The Firm has not experienced, and does not anticipate, that all available lines of credit for these products will be utilized at the same time. The Firm can reduce or cancel these non-legally binding lines of credit by providing the borrower notice or, in some cases, without notice as permitted by law. The Firm may reduce or close home equity lines of credit when there are significant decreases in the value of the underlying property, or

when there has been a demonstrable decline in the creditworthiness of the borrower. Also, the Firm typically closes credit card lines when the borrower is 60 days or more past due.



Off–balance sheet lending-related financial instruments, guarantees and other commitments
	Contractual amount												Carrying value^(g)
	Jun 30, 2013										Dec 31, 2012		Jun 30, 2013			Dec 31, 2012
By remaining maturity (in millions)	Expires in 1 year or less		Expires after 1 year through 3 years		Expires after 3 years through 5 years		Expires after 5 years		Total		Total
Lending-related
Consumer, excluding credit card:
Home equity – senior lien	$	2,501	$	4,609	$	4,764	$	2,348	$	14,222	$	15,180	$	—		$	—
Home equity – junior lien	4,128		7,366		5,815		2,456		19,765		21,796		—			—
Prime mortgage	7,701		—		—		—		7,701		4,107		—			—
Subprime mortgage	—		—		—		—		—		—		—			—
Auto	8,194		227		146		29		8,596		7,185		1			1
Business banking	10,225		595		98		375		11,293		11,092		7			6
Student and other	108		144		5		469		726		796		—			—
Total consumer, excluding credit card	32,857		12,941		10,828		5,677		62,303		60,156		8			7
Credit card	532,359		—		—		—		532,359		533,018		—			—
Total consumer	565,216		12,941		10,828		5,677		594,662		593,174		8			7
Wholesale:
Other unfunded commitments to extend credit^(a)(b)	61,810		83,940		99,091		6,284		251,125		243,225		455			377
Standby letters of credit and other financial guarantees^(a)(b)(c)	26,108		32,013		35,514		1,463		95,098		100,929		634			647
Unused advised lines of credit	80,776		11,740		822		372		93,710		85,087		—			—
Other letters of credit^(a)	4,308		1,112		58		61		5,539		5,573		2			2
Total wholesale	173,002		128,805		135,485		8,180		445,472		434,814		1,091			1,026
Total lending-related	$	738,218	$	141,746	$	146,313	$	13,857	$	1,040,134	$	1,027,988	$	1,099		$	1,033
Other guarantees and commitments
Securities lending indemnification agreements and guarantees^(d)	$	189,113	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	189,113	$	166,493	NA			NA
Derivatives qualifying as guarantees	1,386		1,280		16,942		37,297		56,905		61,738		$	115		$	42
Unsettled reverse repurchase and securities borrowing agreements^(e)	56,657		—		—		—		56,657		34,871		—			—
Loan sale and securitization-related indemnifications:
Mortgage repurchase liability	NA		NA		NA		NA		NA		NA		2,476			2,811
Loans sold with recourse	NA		NA		NA		NA		8,600		9,305		140			141
Other guarantees and commitments^(f)	554		327		1,472		4,248		6,601		6,780		(108		)	(75		)

(a)

At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, reflects the contractual amount net of risk participations totaling $406 million and $473 million, respectively, for other unfunded commitments to extend credit; $15.8 billion and $16.6 billion, respectively, for standby letters of credit and other financial guarantees; and $609 million and $690 million, respectively, for other letters of credit. In regulatory filings with the Federal Reserve these commitments are shown gross of risk participations.

(b)

At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, included credit enhancements and bond and commercial paper liquidity commitments to U.S. states and municipalities, hospitals and other nonprofit entities of $39.9 billion and $44.5 billion, respectively. These commitments also include liquidity facilities to nonconsolidated municipal bond VIEs; for further information, see Note 15 on pages 177–184 of this Form 10-Q.


(c)	At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, included unissued standby letters of credit commitments of $42.6 billion and $44.4 billion, respectively.


(d)	At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, collateral held by the Firm in support of securities lending indemnification agreements was $189.9 billion and $165.1 billion, respectively. Securities lending collateral comprises primarily cash and securities issued by governments that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) and U.S. government agencies.

(e)

At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, the amount of commitments related to forward-starting reverse repurchase agreements and securities borrowing agreements were $11.1 billion and $13.2 billion, respectively. Commitments related to unsettled reverse repurchase agreements and securities borrowing agreements with regular-way settlement periods were $45.6 billion and $21.7 billion, at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively.

(f)

At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, included unfunded commitments of $251 million and $370 million, respectively, to third-party private equity funds; and $1.5 billion, for both periods, to other equity investments. These commitments included $225 million and $333 million, respectively, related to investments that are generally fair valued at net asset value as discussed in Note 3 on pages 114–127 of this Form 10-Q. In addition, at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, included letters of credit hedged by derivative transactions and managed on a market risk basis of $4.6 billion and $4.5 billion, respectively.


(g)	For lending-related products, the carrying value represents the allowance for lending-related commitments and the guarantee liability; for derivative-related products, the carrying value represents the fair value.

Other unfunded commitments to extend credit

Other unfunded commitments to extend credit generally comprise commitments for working capital and general corporate purposes, extensions of credit to support commercial paper facilities and bond financings in the event that those obligations cannot be remarketed to new investors as well as committed liquidity facilities to clearing organizations.

Also included in other unfunded commitments to extend credit are commitments to noninvestment-grade counterparties in connection with leveraged and acquisition finance activities, which were $10.1 billion and $8.8 billion at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively. For further information, see Note 3 and Note 4 on pages 114–127 and 128–130 respectively, of this Form 10-Q.

In addition, the Firm acts as a clearing and custody bank in the U.S. tri-party repurchase transaction market. In its role as clearing and custody bank, the Firm is exposed to intra-day credit risk of the cash borrowers, usually broker-dealers; however, this exposure is secured by collateral and typically extinguished through the settlement process by the end of the day. For the three months ended June 30, 2013, the tri-party repurchase daily balances averaged $332 billion.

Guarantees

The Firm considers the following off–balance sheet lending-related arrangements to be guarantees under U.S. GAAP: standby letters of credit and financial guarantees, securities lending indemnifications, certain indemnification agreements included within third-party contractual arrangements and certain derivative contracts. For a further discussion of the off–balance sheet lending-related arrangements the Firm considers to be guarantees, and the related accounting policies, see Note 29 on pages 308–315 of JPMorgan Chase’s 2012 Annual Report. The recorded amounts of the liabilities related to guarantees and indemnifications at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, excluding the allowance for credit losses on lending-related commitments, are discussed below.

Standby letters of credit and other financial guarantees

Standby letters of credit (“SBLC”) and other financial guarantees are conditional lending commitments issued by the Firm to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party under certain arrangements, such as commercial paper facilities, bond financings, acquisition financings, trade and similar transactions. The carrying values of standby and other letters of credit were $636 million and $649 million at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively, which were classified in accounts payable and other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets; these carrying values included $290 million and $284 million, respectively, for the allowance for lending-related commitments, and $346 million and $365 million, respectively, for the guarantee liability and corresponding asset.

The following table summarizes the types of facilities under which standby letters of credit and other letters of credit arrangements are outstanding by the ratings profiles of the Firm’s customers, as of June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012.

Standby letters of credit, other financial guarantees and other letters of credit



	June 30, 2013					December 31, 2012
(in millions)	Standby letters of credit and other financial guarantees			Other letters of credit		Standby letters of credit and other financial guarantees			Other letters of credit
Investment-grade^(a)		$	72,107	$	4,329		$	77,081	$	3,998
Noninvestment-grade^(a)		22,991		1,210			23,848		1,575
Total contractual amount		$	95,098	$	5,539		$	100,929	$	5,573
Allowance for lending-related commitments		$	288	$	2		$	282	$	2
Commitments with collateral		41,002		1,498			42,654		1,145


(a)	The ratings scale is based on the Firm’s internal ratings which generally correspond to ratings as defined by S&P and Moody’s.

Derivatives qualifying as guarantees

In addition to the contracts described above, the Firm transacts certain derivative contracts that have the characteristics of a guarantee under U.S. GAAP. For further information on these derivatives, see Note 29 on pages 308–315 of JPMorgan Chase’s 2012 Annual Report. The total notional value of the derivatives that the Firm deems to be guarantees was $56.9 billion and $61.7 billion at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively. The notional amount generally represents the Firm’s maximum exposure to derivatives qualifying as guarantees. However, exposure to certain stable value contracts is contractually limited to a substantially lower percentage of the notional amount; the notional amount on these stable value contracts was $26.7 billion and $26.5 billion and the maximum exposure to loss was $2.8 billion at both June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012. The fair values of the contracts reflect the probability of whether the Firm will be required to perform under the contract. The fair value related to derivatives that the Firm deems to be guarantees were derivative payables of $170 million and $122 million and derivative receivables of $55 million and $80 million at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively. The Firm reduces exposures to these contracts by entering into offsetting transactions, or by entering into contracts that hedge the market risk related to the derivative guarantees.

In addition to derivative contracts that meet the characteristics of a guarantee, the Firm is both a purchaser and seller of credit protection in the credit derivatives market. For a further discussion of credit derivatives, see Note 5 on pages 141–142 of this Form 10-Q.

Loan sales- and securitization-related indemnifications

Mortgage repurchase liability

In connection with the Firm’s loan sale and securitization activities with the GSEs and other loan sale and private-label securitization transactions, as described in Note 15 on pages 177–184 of this Form 10-Q, and Note 16 on pages 280–291 of JPMorgan Chase’s 2012 Annual Report, the Firm has made representations and warranties that the loans sold meet certain requirements. The Firm may be, and has been, required to repurchase loans and/or indemnify the GSEs and other investors for losses due to material breaches of these representations and warranties. Generally, the maximum amount of future payments the Firm would be required to make for breaches of these representations and warranties would be equal to the unpaid principal balance of such loans that are deemed to have defects that were sold to purchasers (including securitization-related SPEs) plus, in certain circumstances, accrued interest on such loans and certain expense.

There have been generalized allegations, as well as specific demands, that the Firm repurchase loans sold or deposited into private-label securitizations (including claims from insurers that have guaranteed certain obligations of the securitization trusts). Although the Firm encourages parties to use the contractual repurchase process established in the governing agreements, these private-label repurchase claims have generally manifested themselves through threatened or pending litigation. Accordingly, the liability related to repurchase demands associated with all of the private-label securitizations is separately evaluated by the Firm in establishing its litigation reserves. For additional information regarding litigation, see Note 23 on pages 198–206 of this Form 10-Q and Note 31 on pages 316–325 of JPMorgan Chase’s 2012 Annual Report.

The Firm has recognized a mortgage repurchase liability of $2.5 billion and $2.8 billion, as June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively. This repurchase liability is reported in accounts payable and other liabilities net of probable recoveries from third-party originators of $403 million and $441 million at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively. The Firm’s mortgage repurchase liability is intended to cover losses associated with all loans previously sold in connection with loan sale and securitization transactions with the GSEs, regardless of when those losses occur or how they are ultimately resolved (e.g., repurchase, make-whole payment).

Substantially all of the estimates and assumptions underlying the Firm’s established methodology for computing its recorded mortgage repurchase liability — including factors such as the amount of probable future demands from the GSEs (based on both historical experience and the Firm’s expectations about the GSEs future behavior), the ability of the Firm to cure identified defects, the severity of loss upon repurchase or foreclosure, and recoveries from third parties — require application of a significant level of management judgment.

While the Firm uses the best information available to it in estimating its mortgage repurchase liability, the estimation process is inherently uncertain and imprecise and, accordingly, losses in excess of the amounts accrued as of June 30, 2013, are reasonably possible. The Firm believes the estimate of the range of reasonably possible losses, in excess of its established repurchase liability, is from $0 to approximately $0.7 billion at June 30, 2013. This estimated range of reasonably possible loss considers the Firm’s GSE-related exposure based on an assumed peak to trough decline in home prices of 32%, which is an additional 6 percentage point decline in home prices beyond the Firm’s current assumptions derived from a nationally recognized home price index. Although the Firm does not consider a further decline in home prices of this magnitude likely to occur, such a decline could increase the levels of loan delinquencies, which may, in turn, increase the level of repurchase demands from the GSEs and potentially result in additional repurchases of loans at greater loss severities and thereby increase the Firm’s mortgage repurchase liability.

The following table summarizes the change in the mortgage repurchase liability for each of the periods presented.



Summary of changes in mortgage repurchase liability^(a)
	Three months ended June 30,						Six months ended June 30,
(in millions)	2013			2012			2013			2012
Repurchase liability at beginning of period	$	2,674		$	3,516		$	2,811		$	3,557
Net realized losses^(b)	(191		)	(259		)	(403		)	(623		)
Provision for repurchase losses^(c)	(7		)	36			68			359
Repurchase liability at end of period	$	2,476		$	3,293		$	2,476		$	3,293


(a)	All mortgage repurchase demands associated with private-label securitizations are separately evaluated by the Firm in establishing its litigation reserves.

(b)

Realized repurchase losses are presented net of third-party recoveries and include principal losses and accrued interest on repurchased loans, “make-whole” settlements, settlements with claimants, and certain related expense. Make-whole settlements were $133 million and $107 million for the three months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively and $254 million and $293 million for the six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively.


(c)	Included $6 million and $28 million of provision related to new loan sales for the three months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively and $14 million and $55 million of provision related to new loan sales for the six months ended June 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Loans sold with recourse

The Firm provides servicing for mortgages and certain commercial lending products on both a recourse and nonrecourse basis. In nonrecourse servicing, the principal credit risk to the Firm is the cost of temporary servicing advances of funds (i.e., normal servicing advances). In recourse servicing, the servicer agrees to share credit risk with the owner of the mortgage loans, such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or a private investor, insurer or guarantor. Losses on recourse servicing predominantly occur when foreclosure sales proceeds of the property underlying a defaulted loan are less than the sum of the outstanding principal balance, plus accrued interest on the loan and the cost of holding and disposing of the underlying property. The Firm’s securitizations are predominantly nonrecourse, thereby effectively transferring the risk of future credit losses to the purchaser of the mortgage-backed securities issued by the trust. At June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, the unpaid principal balance of loans sold with recourse totaled $8.6 billion and $9.3 billion, respectively. The carrying value of the related liability that the Firm has recorded, which is representative of the Firm’s view of the likelihood it will have to perform under its recourse obligations, was $140 million and $141 million at June 30, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively.